In Citizens for a Better Eureka v. City of Eureka (2025) __ Cal. App. 5th __, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment dismissing a CEQA action that challenged an approval for the redevelopment of a City of Eureka (City) parking lot into affordable housing (Project). The Court affirmed the dismissal because Petitioner
In Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Benito (2024) 104 Cal.App.5th 22, the Court of Appeal held that the statute of limitations for two CEQA challenges did not begin to run until the Board of Supervisors had heard and decided appeals from the Planning Commission. Because the County of San Benito’s local
On October 21st, the Second District Court of Appeal published a decision in Santa Clarita Organization etc. v. County of Los Angeles (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 1143 that addresses the question of whether a CEQA challenge to an approval of a vesting tentative tract map for a subdivision is subject to the summons requirement
Effective January 1, 2023, Thomas Law Group (TLG) will merge with Downey Brand. We are thrilled to welcome the TLG team to CEQA Chronicles and look forward to sharing their updates on important CEQA developments, new case law, legislation, and guidance.
In American Chemistry Council v. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control (Nov. 18, 2022, F082604)
On July 19, the First District Court of Appeal published its opinion in Communities for a Better Environment v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. In this case, Communities for a Better Environment (CBE) and a host of other environmental groups sought to challenge a rail-to-truck facility for the transloading of crude oil permitted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s ruling that CBE’s petition was time barred under Section 21167(d) of the Public Resources Code for failure to bring the claim within 180 days of BAAQMD’s approval of an Authority to Construct (ATC) that authorized the transloading of Bakken crude. In doing so, both courts rejected the argument by CBE that the “discovery rule” should apply in CEQA cases where, as here, there is no public notice of the approval.